[email protected] writes:
> On +2022-08-09 15:46:17 +0200, Ludovic Courtès wrote: >> Hola, >> >> "pelzflorian (Florian Pelz)" <[email protected]> skribis: >> >> > * the main Spanish translation po/guix/es.po uses usuario >> > >> > * the French translation switches between “utilisateur·rices”, >> > “utilisatrices et utilisateurs” and more often masculine “utilisateurs” >> > >> > * the Portuguese, Russian, German translation use masculine (although at >> > least for German I use feminine in some examples) >> > >> > * German word for users is masculine Benutzer and feminine is >> > Benutzerinnen; there is a psychology study that Benutzer*innen is >> > perceived feminine while listing both masculine and feminine Benutzer >> > und Benutzerinnen is perceived as including men and women (a different >> > language and I might give too much weight to one scientific study) >> > >> > <https://www.hw.uni-wuerzburg.de/aktuelles/news/single/news/gendersternchen-lassen-an-frauen-denken/> >> >> Just like for French, my suggestion would be to use a mixture of several >> techniques to achieve gender neutrality, probably in this order: >> >> • Using gender-neutral words—e.g., “personas” or “quién” rather than >> “usuarios”. >> >> • Talking to the user: “puedes hacer …” rather than “usuarios pueden >> hacer …”. >> >> • Using the -e suffix, which has the advantage of being concise and >> readable, but potentially off-putting (at least today). >> >> • Using repetitions, “usuarias y usuarios”. >> >> Latin languages (among others) are problematic but techniques like these >> can get us a long way, and by mixing them we can avoid making the text >> hard to read. >> >> Ludo’. >> > Hi, > > tl;dr: > > IMO this whole language neutering project, whose goal UIAM is > purportedly to exclude exclusion, is self-contradictory. > ... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paradox_of_tolerance ps.: edited by the bottom reply inquisition :)
